NAHB highlighted 10 expensive and overreaching regulatory programs in comments submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) this week in response to a presidential directive to “alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.”

“Residential construction is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country. In these economic times, the decrease in production, loss of jobs within the industry, and other factors point to the need to reduce the regulatory burden on this vital industry,” NAHB said in its comment letter.

NAHB also urged continued funding for three programs facing proposed budget cuts or elimination: Energy Star, WaterSense and the Sustainable Communities programs.

“NAHB understands that energy efficiency is in the best interest of the nation’s economy, environment, security and energy independence in the long term, and that the nation must look beyond short-term fluctuations in the cost and availability of energy in establishing energy policies and programs,” the comments said.

The Lead, Renovation and Repair Rule needs to be reexamined because an accurate, EPA-approved lead paint testing kit is not yet available. If home owners without small children or anyone who is pregnant in the household could allow their contractors to forego the requirements for lead-safe work practices, they’d save money, and the “target population” for whom the rule was designed would not be affected.

The new rules that define what constitutes a water of the United States – for which enforcement has already been stayed by the courts – need to be jettisoned all together, NAHB wrote. “NAHB looks forward to working with the Trump Administration, EPA and the Corps to develop a clear, commonsense rule to protect our nation’s waterways while taking into account the interests of local businesses and communities nationwide,” the comments said.

Stormwater management regulations continue to cause confusion – ironically in the wake of new “streamlining” measures designed to fix the problem. “Paperwork violations related to record keeping for Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan or SWPPP implementation, for example, often do not result in real water quality improvements, and only serve to increase administrative costs for cities, states, and EPA,” the letter said.